Anything goes? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Anything goes? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Tillie_the_Pirate
08-03-06, 08:09 PM As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do".

But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way.

How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?
Always-Late
08-03-06, 08:11 PM As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do".

But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way.

How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?If they assault people in broad daylight in a city for absolutely no reason whatsoever, the guard comes down and locks them in jail. Usually I follow things to their logical conclusion.

If they run around killing and torturing homeless people just for kicks, rocks fall, people die, and I leave the table.
hisnamehere
08-03-06, 08:27 PM While the occasional bad (read, stupid) plan is part of a campaign and should teach the players a lesson (while not killing too many of them), consistant stupid moves are definately a problem.

The way I see it, this could be due 2 problems:

1) The players have not been shown a reason to play smart, or;
2) The players are not smart enough to play smart.

Now, if you are simply a bit beyond them in your style of play/DMing, you're going to have to use a helpful hand to show them the "proper" way to play, or else possibly find another gaming group.

If your players are just in a stupid rut, it might be time to be a just a little bit cruel and bring out the tough love for the betterment of your game. If they get in a bad situation, make them find their own way out (if there even is one).

Prolonging this (as with the "thrown in jail" suggestion) is not the way to go. If they do something that people won't tolerate, have the people be intolerant and do what most intolerant players/characters do to anyone who looks at them funny. If they decide that the best course of action is to obliterate any obstacle in front of them regardless of how seemingly dangerous/overpowered, don't pull your punches. If they're just being immature and/or sociopathic, you may want to report them to the guidance councellor and/or police (after confiscating all their gaming books). ;)

Remember that interaction with your gaming group(s) is just like interaction with any other individual or group in our real world. Their are politics (whether we like them or not), emotions (good and bad), and morals and ethics that need to be addressed. As the DM, you are the president/prime minister/tsar/king/rajah/emporer/master. You can choose how to rule your lands and how to deal with civil unrest (or stupidness).
Kursk
08-03-06, 08:32 PM I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way.

How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?

I've never controlled PC's unless they were under a spell. Not the DM's job. As a DM you have enough to do with trying to be a player too. See my sig.
Toloran
08-03-06, 08:39 PM I generally allow my PCs to do anything the want as long as they could feasabily do it and it is within their characters alignment/stats to do thus (even if it is stupid). They want to run straight at a wall because they believe it is an illusion, they can go right ahead. They want to light a match in a coal mine when the air is full of coal dust? They can go right ahead.
Tillie_the_Pirate
08-03-06, 09:37 PM See my sig.

Can I use that in the game? I can see it now...

Player: I jump into the Spike Pit of No Escape after the wizard who took my amulet who appeared to jump into a portal.
DM: You die. Roll new character.
Player: Ouch. Don't I get a Reflex check?
DM: There is no save against stupidity.
Callahan
08-03-06, 09:54 PM why don't you try a few "games".

as in less RP and more hacking, like Kobolds are my baby (http://www.koboldsatemybaby.com/). Then when they calm down you can play your campaign.
Wyrmul
08-03-06, 10:15 PM DM: Aren't you forgetting something?
Player: Oh yeah... AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhh!

Granted that is a pretty poor example of letting the PC's do as the want. "The Gamers" is not there to show how a good game is run. It makes fun of the stereotypes our games can fall into.

While most of us have had an NPC like "The Shadow!(TM)" in our games or tried to sneak attack with a balista at one point or another, it is not a good idea in game. Squeaka Squeaka Squeaka

Your players should have a measure of freedom of choice. But choices, even not choosing wen given the opportunity, have consequences. That is the nature of choices. So if the characters don't follow the hooks about the cult summoning a deamon, let the deamon be summoned and have the players have to deal with what happens then. They don't help, or kill, the messenger bearing a peace proposal, let the war continue.

Not every choice shoild have a negative consequence, but sometimes even the right choices needs a negative consequence.

And you have MY biting social commentary
Kursk
08-04-06, 03:39 AM Can I use that in the game? I can see it now...

Player: I jump into the Spike Pit of No Escape after the wizard who took my amulet who appeared to jump into a portal.
DM: You die. Roll new character.
Player: Ouch. Don't I get a Reflex check?
DM: There is no save against stupidity.

You obviously don't get the meaning...
Tillie_the_Pirate
08-04-06, 04:00 AM I know, I was rushed. I'll use it when... it works best. :)
Nived
08-04-06, 04:06 AM The three questions rule has long been a rule around our table. Surpisingly even though we talk about it a lot... when you think you have a good idea and you're subject to it you don't see it, still its fair.

The three questions.

"Wait... you do what?" Should be an indicator of danger.
"Are you sure?" Should ba a warning sign with red flashing lights.
"So you ....repeat everything the player said slowly ending with a raised voice indicating a question... ?" The last warning.

Well if they insist on continuing they get their consiquences... you gave them their chance to stop.

In character actions bring in character consiquences.
Kursk
08-04-06, 04:53 AM I know, I was rushed. I'll use it when... it works best. :)

Yeah, I view it as just not interfering with the PC's. I will always give needed info so they can make a correct decision if they think about it. I always keep in mind that they can't really see the room, corridor, etc. and it is up to me to give enough info so the player can make intelligent decisions. If someone says, "I run forward and jump", I will remind them that it's a 100' drop because their character would be looking at it. But if they say, "I know, but I jump anyway", well then the chips have to fall where they may. :)
Leilond
08-04-06, 08:43 AM As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do".

But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way.

How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?
I always let them do what they want. If they do dumb things they'll obtain dumb results
Ankalagon
08-04-06, 09:09 AM "I know, but I jump anyway", well then the chips have to fall where they may. :)
I pretty much sign up to that way of doing things although I believe there is a place for everything with varying degrees of moderation. When players roll dice that is an outcome and I never fudge that but while stupidity in game should have in game consequences I am reluctant to kill a session because a player left his brain at the beer counter on the way to game night if I can possibly prevent it.
Tormsskull
08-04-06, 09:15 AM The three questions rule has long been a rule around our table. Surpisingly even though we talk about it a lot... when you think you have a good idea and you're subject to it you don't see it, still its fair.

The three questions.

"Wait... you do what?" Should be an indicator of danger.
"Are you sure?" Should ba a warning sign with red flashing lights.
"So you ....repeat everything the player said slowly ending with a raised voice indicating a question... ?" The last warning.

Well if they insist on continuing they get their consiquences... you gave them their chance to stop.

In character actions bring in character consiquences.

I'm Tormsskull and I approve this message.

(Too many political adds on TV now :P)
Gottwick
08-04-06, 01:59 PM I also check to make sure individuals meant what they said. No DM is perfect. You may not have explained the situation very well, or they might have misunderstood. I'm not going to kill a character because they didn't understand the spikes are 3' long and not 3" long.

When the whole party discusses things, I call that "the land-air-sea invasion." It's usually too complex. And yes, sometimes I sarcastically rephrase utterly suicidal plans back at them too. "Oh, so you're just going to jump the 30-foot wide pit and fight the monster alone while the rest swing across on the vine one at a time? How many hit points do you have again?"

But if you say "what?" when someone quietly brings up an excellent idea, it makes them discuss it more.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tillie_the_Pirate 08-03-06, 08:09 PM	As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do". But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way. How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?
Always-Late 08-03-06, 08:11 PM	As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do". But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way. How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them?If they assault people in broad daylight in a city for absolutely no reason whatsoever, the guard comes down and locks them in jail. Usually I follow things to their logical conclusion. If they run around killing and torturing homeless people just for kicks, rocks fall, people die, and I leave the table.
hisnamehere 08-03-06, 08:27 PM	While the occasional bad (read, stupid) plan is part of a campaign and should teach the players a lesson (while not killing too many of them), consistant stupid moves are definately a problem. The way I see it, this could be due 2 problems: 1) The players have not been shown a reason to play smart, or; 2) The players are not smart enough to play smart. Now, if you are simply a bit beyond them in your style of play/DMing, you're going to have to use a helpful hand to show them the "proper" way to play, or else possibly find another gaming group. If your players are just in a stupid rut, it might be time to be a just a little bit cruel and bring out the tough love for the betterment of your game. If they get in a bad situation, make them find their own way out (if there even is one). Prolonging this (as with the "thrown in jail" suggestion) is not the way to go. If they do something that people won't tolerate, have the people be intolerant and do what most intolerant players/characters do to anyone who looks at them funny. If they decide that the best course of action is to obliterate any obstacle in front of them regardless of how seemingly dangerous/overpowered, don't pull your punches. If they're just being immature and/or sociopathic, you may want to report them to the guidance councellor and/or police (after confiscating all their gaming books). ;) Remember that interaction with your gaming group(s) is just like interaction with any other individual or group in our real world. Their are politics (whether we like them or not), emotions (good and bad), and morals and ethics that need to be addressed. As the DM, you are the president/prime minister/tsar/king/rajah/emporer/master. You can choose how to rule your lands and how to deal with civil unrest (or stupidness).
Kursk 08-03-06, 08:32 PM	I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way. How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them? I've never controlled PC's unless they were under a spell. Not the DM's job. As a DM you have enough to do with trying to be a player too. See my sig.
Toloran 08-03-06, 08:39 PM	I generally allow my PCs to do anything the want as long as they could feasabily do it and it is within their characters alignment/stats to do thus (even if it is stupid). They want to run straight at a wall because they believe it is an illusion, they can go right ahead. They want to light a match in a coal mine when the air is full of coal dust? They can go right ahead.
Tillie_the_Pirate 08-03-06, 09:37 PM	See my sig. Can I use that in the game? I can see it now... Player: I jump into the Spike Pit of No Escape after the wizard who took my amulet who appeared to jump into a portal. DM: You die. Roll new character. Player: Ouch. Don't I get a Reflex check? DM: There is no save against stupidity.
Callahan 08-03-06, 09:54 PM	why don't you try a few "games". as in less RP and more hacking, like Kobolds are my baby (http://www.koboldsatemybaby.com/). Then when they calm down you can play your campaign.
Wyrmul 08-03-06, 10:15 PM	DM: Aren't you forgetting something? Player: Oh yeah... AAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhh! Granted that is a pretty poor example of letting the PC's do as the want. "The Gamers" is not there to show how a good game is run. It makes fun of the stereotypes our games can fall into. While most of us have had an NPC like "The Shadow!(TM)" in our games or tried to sneak attack with a balista at one point or another, it is not a good idea in game. Squeaka Squeaka Squeaka Your players should have a measure of freedom of choice. But choices, even not choosing wen given the opportunity, have consequences. That is the nature of choices. So if the characters don't follow the hooks about the cult summoning a deamon, let the deamon be summoned and have the players have to deal with what happens then. They don't help, or kill, the messenger bearing a peace proposal, let the war continue. Not every choice shoild have a negative consequence, but sometimes even the right choices needs a negative consequence. And you have MY biting social commentary
Kursk 08-04-06, 03:39 AM	Can I use that in the game? I can see it now... Player: I jump into the Spike Pit of No Escape after the wizard who took my amulet who appeared to jump into a portal. DM: You die. Roll new character. Player: Ouch. Don't I get a Reflex check? DM: There is no save against stupidity. You obviously don't get the meaning...
Tillie_the_Pirate 08-04-06, 04:00 AM	I know, I was rushed. I'll use it when... it works best. :)
Nived 08-04-06, 04:06 AM	The three questions rule has long been a rule around our table. Surpisingly even though we talk about it a lot... when you think you have a good idea and you're subject to it you don't see it, still its fair. The three questions. "Wait... you do what?" Should be an indicator of danger. "Are you sure?" Should ba a warning sign with red flashing lights. "So you ....repeat everything the player said slowly ending with a raised voice indicating a question... ?" The last warning. Well if they insist on continuing they get their consiquences... you gave them their chance to stop. In character actions bring in character consiquences.
Kursk 08-04-06, 04:53 AM	I know, I was rushed. I'll use it when... it works best. :) Yeah, I view it as just not interfering with the PC's. I will always give needed info so they can make a correct decision if they think about it. I always keep in mind that they can't really see the room, corridor, etc. and it is up to me to give enough info so the player can make intelligent decisions. If someone says, "I run forward and jump", I will remind them that it's a 100' drop because their character would be looking at it. But if they say, "I know, but I jump anyway", well then the chips have to fall where they may. :)
Leilond 08-04-06, 08:43 AM	As the DM, occasionally I say "that's just dumb guys, what do you really want to do". But after seeing three party members punch the mage to death trying to knock him unconscious to cross the river in "The Gamers", I was thinking; why not just let the players do whatever they want, and tell them what happens? That way, they actually do what they want, and they simply have to deal with the repercussions if they come their way. How do you deal with dumb moves on your table; do you let them happen and let them die, or do you try to keep your players from doing them? I always let them do what they want. If they do dumb things they'll obtain dumb results
Ankalagon 08-04-06, 09:09 AM	"I know, but I jump anyway", well then the chips have to fall where they may. :) I pretty much sign up to that way of doing things although I believe there is a place for everything with varying degrees of moderation. When players roll dice that is an outcome and I never fudge that but while stupidity in game should have in game consequences I am reluctant to kill a session because a player left his brain at the beer counter on the way to game night if I can possibly prevent it.
Tormsskull 08-04-06, 09:15 AM	The three questions rule has long been a rule around our table. Surpisingly even though we talk about it a lot... when you think you have a good idea and you're subject to it you don't see it, still its fair. The three questions. "Wait... you do what?" Should be an indicator of danger. "Are you sure?" Should ba a warning sign with red flashing lights. "So you ....repeat everything the player said slowly ending with a raised voice indicating a question... ?" The last warning. Well if they insist on continuing they get their consiquences... you gave them their chance to stop. In character actions bring in character consiquences. I'm Tormsskull and I approve this message. (Too many political adds on TV now :P)
Gottwick 08-04-06, 01:59 PM	I also check to make sure individuals meant what they said. No DM is perfect. You may not have explained the situation very well, or they might have misunderstood. I'm not going to kill a character because they didn't understand the spikes are 3' long and not 3" long. When the whole party discusses things, I call that "the land-air-sea invasion." It's usually too complex. And yes, sometimes I sarcastically rephrase utterly suicidal plans back at them too. "Oh, so you're just going to jump the 30-foot wide pit and fight the monster alone while the rest swing across on the vine one at a time? How many hit points do you have again?" But if you say "what?" when someone quietly brings up an excellent idea, it makes them discuss it more.